similar to: Ipsec and Proxy arp

Hello Tom, I have successfully configured proxy arp subnettinng on my network with three hosts in a Dmz. And it works great. (using proxyarp in interfaces) I also tryed this on network below same trouble. However for this network below I have tryed to configure one host in a Dmz (using /etc/shorewall/proxyarp) which works and comes up after I set it up and clear Isp''s arp

In an effert move my Dmz from a snapqear roouter to Linux with shorewall. Question is I have network 64.42.53.200/29 which makes default gw 64.42.53.201 network 64.42.53.200 broadcast 64.42.53.207 mask 255.255.255.248 and I want to set up shorewall with eth0 64.42.53.202 eth1 local eth2 dmz where dmz will use say 64.42.53.203 for web and email server. Where I do not need or should I say use

Hello Tom, I am not sure if you can help with this but I am at my wits end. If you hit this site and do a force refresh (ctrl + F5) the site will time out and lose connections. Do the same on port 443 and it does not time out??? The web site I am reffering to is www.tituswill.com I think the only problem is port 80. Do you have any idea how to diagnose this I have sent a dump of just

I am have a shorewall firewall and freeswan ipsec running on a redhat 8.0 Linux gateway machine. I have one working tunnel defined, all works well. I am not clear how to define mutiple concurrent tunnels. I can not add further interface entries as all the tunnels come in on ipsec0, do I still have mutiple zone definitions? some of the tunnels will be dynamic roadwarriors and as such would need a

Hello Gurus, I am a small problem with routing and here are the details. Interfaces on my server: * ipsec0 - 172.19.58.94 * tunl0 - 172.19.58.94 * eth0 - 172.19.58.94 Now, the problem is that there is another host 172.19.58.200. All communication to 172.19.58.200 should be through tunl0, and all the data should be secured using IPSec (tunnel mode - because there are more machines on my

Hello, it looks like the usual way to do ipsec on centos5 won't work anymore on centos6 I installed ipsec-tools but an interface type IPsec is not recognized by the kernel ifup ipsec0 Device does not seem to be present, delaying initialization. I am not planning to use the awful OpenSwan, I Want to sue the Kame implementation which was working fine on CentOS5 any hints ? thank you

Hi, Could not conceive an working set-up for an IPSEC VPN made with racoon/setkey on which I have one address on my side acting as an SNAT router for all traffic from my network to a network segment on the far side. my network --- my gateway ---------------------- remote network 10.0.0.0/24 - 10.0.0.1 (10.253.0.2) -- tunnel - 192.168.0.0/22 All traffic starts on my side, so if I can

I am attempting to create an ipsec tunnel between two CentOS 5.1 systems, network-to-network with two different 192.168.xxx.0/24 LAN segments. I have gone through the documentation on the centos web site, and have the machines to the point where the /var/log/messages show ``IPsec-SA established'' on both machines after runnig ``ifup ipsec0'' (same ipsec0 on each machine). IP

Hello, I use Julian Anastasov ''routes'' (to be more specific: static_routes, alt_routes and nf_reroute) patches on a 2.4.32 kernel. On the same host I run IPSec. I have discovered after a few hours of networking problems that, when IPSec is enabled on that patched kernel, inspecting packets with tcpdump while arping-ing a host from a network physically connected to this

Hi, I''m trying to set-up an ipsec tunnel between a Redhat9 box and a Netgear FVS318. When trying to initialise the connection - ifup ipsec0 - I get the error: RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable This would lead me to believe shorewall is blocking ipsec. My config is below. The output of ''shorewall status'' is attached. Any help in pointing out if I''ve

I just got the list confirmation and noticed it''s text only email so here it is again in plain text. Below is the oringal message. Hi all, I am really struggling with this one, I have built a lot of linux machines using IPSEC tunnels and shorewall gateways. I decied to build a new test machine with Debian running 2.4.25 and Shorewall 2.0.15. I have two subnets on their own switches and

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello, been awhile since I''ve written. I now have a situation where I get to use traffic shaping for a client. ~ We implemented the WonderShaper script on our own firewall and experienced no problems. I made some modifications to it to add IPSec protocol packets into the 1:10 high priority class using the u32 filter. ~ So far on our

hi, I can''t get a freeswan 2.02 ipsec x509 connection at work can somebody help me? ************************************************************************************* global situation ************************************************************************************* the linux gateway (chivas) is a single machine 192.168.1.250 with a local net 192.168.1.0/24, a dyn IP via a DSL

Hi, I have setup a IPSEC VPN using Openswan to connect a Draytek router to a CentOS 5.2/Shorewall 4.2.9 firewall. The VPN establishes OK but I''m getting a problem with packets from the left hand subnet getting masqueraded rather than routed down the IPSEC VPN as though they were going out onto the net. I''ve spent the last day searching Google and so far I''ve hit a

Hi. I am trying to force some traffic that goes to address 203.7.93.94 through a VPN tunnel. I use freeswan 1.98b and Shorewall 1.4.6c in one machine. The 203.7.93.94 is in the DMZ on the other end. (Both ends use the same shorewall and freeswan). I have successfully set up a tunnel between the two network (using a point to point topology, not hub). I added a static routing that redirect

Hello Mailinglist, please excuse my bad english - but I am not a native speaker. My Network looks like this: Internet --- dyn. IP --- Firewall (shorewall) --- LAN (192.168.X.X) No I try to connect my iphone (from mobile Internet G3) over VPN (l2tp/ipsec) with the firewall. But I can´t open the necessary Port 1701. /var/log/syslog ... Dec 30 00:24:29 router kernel: [226128.293757]

Hey Tom, I have successfully set up to servers on a Dmz practice network woohoo :). If I take out the proxyarp option in /etc/shorewall/interfaces Then Dmz can ping outside ip''s on the net but not and of my servers on network 66.224.62.96/27 (Other than its own gateway server 66.224.62.120) The reason I ask is to learn. I thought I would not need the proxyarp option for this to

Tuomo Soini wrote: > You don''t happen to read shorewall-devel mailinglist ? I read it -- I just didn''t know what to make of your post and it arrived while I was on vacation. What exactly are you trying to accomplish that Shorewall isn''t doing for you now? e.g. /etc/shorewall/zones rw Roadwarriors Road Warriors /etc/shorewall/interfraces rw ipsec+

I have had a web server listining sql-1433, www 80, ftp-21 using proxy arp with sub-netting in a three interface DMZ. All these ports are in the rules file as ACCEPT. With one exeception that 1433 allows a few host from the net. 21 and 80 allow all net to dmz connections. The policy is DMZ to net ACCEPT This has been working great for about a month or more until I rebooted the

Hello, You may recall some of My Dmz question around Thanksgiving. While I have configured a Proxy arp Dmz. I would like to practice with the routed setup you suggested Tom as your network was simular. Here is one of your quotes "The configuration of eth2 is largely irrelevant but you certainly don''t want to confuse things by assigning any default gateway out of that